Now that the President has finished soiling my state with his presence tonight, I wanted to say something about a subject @benjaminwittes @qjurecic & other writers at @lawfareblog have addressed from time to time. It concerns Robert Mueller. <Thread>
2. Donald Trump is not on the ballot this November. As far as I know, none of the people who are on the ballot figure in Mueller’s investigation. Now, the Justice Department has a general policy against making announcements about criminal matters that might affect elections.
3. That’s fair enough — certainly after the FBI’s experience with @Comey and Hillary Clinton’s e-mails two years ago. Clinton, of course, was on the ballot then. We’re in a different situation now. No doubt there are Republican candidates, like @tedcruz or @MarshaBlackburn ...
4... who look on President Trump as their Leader — he says, they do. But that’s hardly the Justice Department’s problem. Moreover, withholding significant indictments until after the midterms could be said to influence the elections as much as would announcing the indictments.
5. Finally — unpleasant as it is to contemplate this — there is every possibility that as soon as the election is over the President will seize the opportunity to purge what he thinks ought to be “his” Justice Department, including Mueller. Perhaps this cannot be prevented...
6... but it should surely be prepared for. Mueller runs a famously tight ship; I don’t know the status of his investigation, or whether further indictments or plea deals are ready to announce. But if they are, they should be announced forthwith.
7. No doubt this would displease the President. But I suspect even many Republican candidates would join most Americans in rejoicing at the timely progress of an important investigation, moving forward without regard to squalid political considerations. [end]
